For any Solicitor or Barrister (including KC’s) undertaking criminal legal aid work, the level of remuneration is set by Government. The ability to challenge the fees payable is limited and requires specialist skill and knowledge. Martin is one of the foremost experts in such appeals and can assist Solicitors and Counsel in their appeals, including on a Direct Access basis.
The primary issues that commonly arise can include:
Martin has been involved in such appeals for many years and is one of few specialist Counsel to regularly appear at the High Court before Costs Judges. He has been involved in some of the most important decisions, some of which are set out below. Martin will be able to advise on the merits of any prospective Costs appeal. He will be able to prepare the bundles of documents required and skeleton arguments. He has lectured to the Criminal Bar Association on these matters.
R v Thomas [2024] EWHC 1325 (SCCO) (whether the case was a trial or a craceked trial. Succesfully argued it was a trial).
R v Lock [2024] EWHC 1324 (SCCO) (whether the case was a trial and re-trial ro one trial. Succesfully argued it was two trials).
R v Zigaras & Nikontas SCCO Ref 155/18, 197/18, 243/18 & 275/18 (in which he successfully persuaded the Court to upscale A4 pages because of the small font);
R v Francis SCCO Ref: SC-2020-CRI-000004 (in which he successfully persuaded the Court to upscale A4 x8);
R v Carter SCCO -2020-CRI-000100 (successful appeal concerning allowance for images even though none relevant);
R v Mooney SCC) Ref:99/18 (successful PPE appeal 5,225 pages increased to 10,000 cap);
R v Shaikh SC-2019-CRI000137 (successful appeal remunerating for a trial rather than a cracked trial);
R v Campbell SC-2020-CRI-000254 and 2021-000001 (successful appeal for Counsel on category and Solicitors on PPE increasing PPE by 4826 pages);
R v Sereika SCCO 168/13 (successful appeal and now leading case on percentage of images payable);
R v Thomas SC-2020-CRI-000078 (successful. Separate fee for stayed indictment).
